As Heard on The Stephanie Miller Show

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Proposition 8 here in CA, if passed, would specify that marriage be defined as a union between one man and one woman only. The stuff that has been thrown about by its supporters has been stinging...and wrong.

Listen to thier ad...and the rebuttals from those against.

Oh, and one more. Senator Diane Feinstein:

I think you know where I am going with this. I say this not just as a bisexual man, but as a black man who lived in the days of miscengenation, where you could not marry a person of another race.

The world laughs at us and our misguidedness disguised as "morals." If you are in California, I urge you do the right thing and vote no on this. And if you are no in California, help the cuase by going to this website and donating so the the word can go on in these last 5 days:

Monday, October 27, 2008

Oakland Police Preparing For Election Reaction

OAKLAND -- The Oakland Police Department and many others around the country are preparing for whatever may happen on Election Night, November 4th. There is concern there could be a large and very public response because of the historic nature of presidential race and so much interest among American citizens.

Some internet blogs talk about massive protests if it appears that Democratic nominee Senator Barack Obama loses, since he is leading in the polls.

To prepare, Assistant Chief Howard Jordan of the Oakland Police said that police officers are being made aware of the crowd control policies. While he says he doesn't anticipate any problems, the department will be ready for celebrations or even riots. Jordan said there will be no changes in staffing; the same number of officers will be on duty as on any Tuesday. But they could be moved around to deal with large crowds.

Jordan also said that the department has been thinking about this and other contingencies for some time. "We've been keeping track of things that are happening around the nation, probably over the last 3 or 4 months. Watching the news, watching the polls. We have officers to monitor that and looking at things in terms of crowd control." In particular he said that they look to see what other large cities do when the candidates come to town and how they deal with the opponents of those candidates.

Jordan said Oakland wants its residents to know that they will be able to express their first amendment rights. But he also said police will enforce the law and protect people and property so that public safety won't be compromised.

Law enforcement agencies reported a slight decrease in hate crimes last year, despite an increase against gays and lesbians.

The FBI reported more than 7,600 hate crime incidents in 2007, down about 1 percent from last year.

Racially motivated hate crimes accounted for 50.8 percent of that total. Religious bias was the second-leading motive for hate crimes at 18.4 percent, followed by prejudice against sexual orientation at 16.6 percent. Bias based on ethnicity or national origin made up 13.2 percent.

According to the report, 5,408 hate crime offenses last year were classified as crimes against persons. Intimidation accounted for 47.4 percent of such crimes, simple assaults accounted for 31.1 percent and aggravated assaults for 20.6 percent. Nine murders were reported as hate crimes, the report said.

In addition, the report found that 3,579 hate crime offenses were classified as property crimes.

Within those categories, the FBI report found most hate crimes tended to be anti-black, anti-Jewish and anti-gay, with 62.9 percent of the 6,965 known offenders being white and 20.8 percent being black. The race was unknown for 9.8 percent and other races accounted for the remaining known offenders, the report said.

The FBI report is purely statistical and does not assign a cause for the slight overall decrease or the 6 percent increase in anti-gay hate crimes.

Friday, October 24, 2008

As a card-carrying liberal, I have dealt with the term "looney left" for the last 12-years, especially from fools of questionable sexual orientation who seem to have fetishes for loofahs.

And yes, they do trot out the occasional Julia "Butterfly" Hill, who...those she does not seem to have any proof of susatainable income....seems to wont to live in any tree that's about to be cut by a strip mall.

But when it comes to sheer insanity, nothing beats our friends at the far left of the room. Especially the pinheads who work for our dear friend, Donald "NoNeck" Wildmon of the American Family ASSociation.

But the craziest one yet is this: Mattel...the house of BARBIE, for God's sake...is in league with Radical Islam (to them Islam is ALWAYS radical).

Here is the story.....I shat you not:

Some concerned parents have contacted the Mattel toy company with allegations that one of its dolls utters words which promote Islam.

The Little Mommy Cuddle 'n Coo dolls are manufactured by Fisher-Price, which is part of the Mattel toy empire. However, a number of parents contacted the company when they heard the doll say these words: "Islam is the light."

While the doll appears to utter "Islam is the light," the company denies that is actually what it is programmed to say. Mattel insists that Little Mommy Cuddle 'n Coo features realistic baby sounds, including cooing, giggling, and baby babble, with no real sentence structure. The toy company claims the only scripted word the doll says is "mama."

Mattel also contends that because the original sound track is compressed into a file that can be played through an inexpensive toy speaker, actual sounds may be imprecise or distorted. Jan Markell, founder and director of Olive Tree Ministries, is skeptical about Mattel's explanation.

"It does seem to be saying, 'Islam is the light.' I don't think too many people would argue with that, so I think they're being a little disingenuous," Markell points out. "And this is not a healthy thing to be putting out in the marketplace when we're in a war on terror, and little children are so susceptible to the messages they hear -- even from a doll -- then to take them into the school and talk about them. So yeah, this is a serious thing."

Mattel admits the doll makes a sound that may resemble the words "night," right," or "light." To avoid any potential misinterpretation, they have eliminated that segment of the sound file from future production.

Now the afore mentioned Ms. Markel runs the also-afore-mentioned Olive Tree Ministries. On thier website, they talk about "phophetic signs, current issues, and the Messianic Jewish movement." On that site they also talk about...well, let's let the site speak for itself:

It says in Revelation 13 that there will some day be a one world system; a one world government. Some have termed this “the new world order”. Another term heard frequently that means the same thing is “globalism”. Various organizations are playing into this. The leading ones include the United Nations, the European Union, and NATO, but more minor players would be world trade organizations like the “North American Free Trade Association” (NAFTA). The Antichrist will be the chief globalist and will head up this one world system during the Tribulation. The stage is being set.

That page talks about the omniprescent computer chips that supposedly are marked "666," worldwide currencies that are not The Dollar, and various NWO matters.

Then there are thoughts on "The Rapture" (not the 80's Blondie rap hit)"

The Three Quarters Rapture Theory--> Posted to Prophecy for October, 2008

Robert Van Kampen was the inventor of the three-quarters rapture theory in the late 1970s. According to one who was there, he first eliminated pretribulationism and then excluded posttribulationism. Thus, he had to come up with another view. That view is what he called the "pre-wrath" rapture theory. That title is a misnomer, since pretribulationism is 100% pre-wrath. If we follow consistency in labeling, Van Kampen's view should be called the three-quarters rapture position, since he teaches that the church will be raptured somewhere in the middle of the last three and a half years of the 70th week of Daniel.

In other words, this is the woman who thinks a doll is summoning little girls to wear burkas. No to mention the type of person who seems to be an inspiration to as certain Alaskan hockey mom mentioned recently.

Maybe even large sections of an entire political party.

Another round of strait-jackets, please. And please don't damage the rubber on the walls.

Monday, October 20, 2008

Optimist

84 optimism, 67 faith, and 73 logic!

Optimists are a dying breed in this day and age. To the optimists, the world is a positive place. Everything is inherently good, and all things will work out in the end. They believe violence will one day be replaced with logic and reason, and that all religions can coexisist peacefully. These are the people who always see the glass half full, and believe that we live in the best possible world.

If you thought shows like Jerry Springer and Hole in the Wall were strange, get a load of this.

from the wiki folks (because there is no way I can describe this sh*t!):

Queen for a Day was an American radio and television show. It helped usher in American broadcast listeners' and viewers' fascination with big prize giveaway shows when it was born on radio (1945–1957), before moving to television (1947–1964; 1969–1970) and, between the two versions, making it a forerunner of "reality television".The show became popular enough that NBC increased its running time from 30 to 45 minutes.

Jack Bailey (who looke like wh was almost always three sheets to the wind..) hosted both the original radio show and the original daytime television version, first for Mutual, then NBC, and finally ABC. Using the classic "applause meter" as did many game or hit-parade style shows of the time, Queen for a Day contestants told why they would like the honour—and the twist of it was that the contestant had to talk publicly about the recent hard times she had been through.

It was something of an inverted Horatio Alger syndrome: instead of boy or girl making good, strictly speaking, the lure of Queen for a Day was woman making rock bottom (or close enough to it; the tearjerking factor was always part of the show's appeal) in order to have a one-in-four chance at best of making good, or at least a little less burdened, for at least one day in her life. The more harsh the circumstances that led a contestant to want to appear, the likelier the studio audience was to ring the applause meter's highest level. And, to the full accompaniment of "Pomp and Circumstance", the winner would be draped in a red velvet robe and a shimmering crown, and she would be festooned with a dozen long-stemmed roses, trips, a fully-paid night on the town with her husband or her escort, and other prizes. "Make every woman a queen, for every single day!" would be Bailey's trademark signoff.

Some critics accused the show of exploiting rather than enhancing the women who competed and the audience (in studio and at home) who watched (no sh*t, Sherlock. Of course theydidn't have to apply, now....did they?).

Saturday, October 18, 2008

I really started sometime yesterday. As many of you who are linked to me on Multiply know, I posted a video yesterday: Naomi Wolf talking about how we seem to be in the last days of what we know as freedom in these United States. I was a pretty scary piece, but I realized afterwards that it could very well be the rantings of a very attractive paranoiac. I mean, US troops already deployed on US soil, c'mon! Its like we're getting ready for some....race war or something, huh?

Then I started listening to a Olbermann mp3 of a few days ago: suggesting that with the impromptu shouts of "kill him" directed at Barack Obama at Sarah Palin rallies that the McCain camp is, if only in silence, inciting to riot:

The inference is that if Obama wins, there would be an undercurrent that would lead to his assassination. What Olbermann does not mention....and as you know I love the man dearly....is that if that logic is followed and, for some reason, Obama does not win, non-whites would riot. Many second-and-third-tier conservative radio bloviators have already blurted that idea out.

And what is really not mentioned is that there are people on both sides, frustrated, art the end of their respective ropes, who would do just that.

Then there is this gay marriage thing.

As some of you know, there is an amendment to our ever-growing state Constitution in Cal-lee-fornia that would erase the freedoms won by same-sex couples to marry each other, granted by the courts earlier this year. This afternoon, on my way to this terminal, I was confronted by smiling, pink-faced young maidens holding yellow signs saying "Prop8=Free Speech!" "Prop 8=Religious Freedom!" And such.

Never has bigotry looked so........wholesome.

Most bigotry stems from fear, and Prop 8 is fuel my the hi-test kind. Donald Wildmon, head of the American Family Association (and a favorite target of mine, I must admit) has said that if 8 fails, the so-called "culture war" would be lost.

The kind of rhetoric being used by the anti-gay agitators pretty much cements the idea that legalized same-sex marriage in any way, shape, form, or fashion, would cause the end of the Age, and bring on the wrath of God.

For instance, the words of Orson Scott Card, an author who has stated, very plainly, how he feels about gays getting hitched....

"Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn. Only when the marriage of heterosexuals has the support of the whole society can we have our best hope of raising each new generation to aspire to continue our civilization.." -Orson Scott Card

Now if you feel like that, and you find out on November 6th that Ellen and Portia are still legally married, you might not feel so happy.

Some people might even feel angry. Enough for violence, maybe.

Now turn the tables around. You are gay, and and you are married, and now the people of the state say that you can't.

See where I'm heading......

And then there is this: we have been waiting for eight years for OBL to drop the other shoe. Maybe this is.....it:

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Oct. 17 -- Four of the five main online forums that al-Qaeda's media wing uses to distribute statements by Osama bin Laden and other extremists have been disabled since mid-September, monitors of the Web sites say. The disappearance of the forums on Sept. 10 -- and al-Qaeda's apparent inability to restore them or create alternate online venues, as it has before -- has curbed the organization's dissemination of the words and images of its fugitive leaders. On Sept. 29, a statement by the al-Fajr Media Center, a distribution network created by supporters of al-Qaeda and other Sunni extremist groups, said the forums had disappeared "for technical reasons," and it urged followers not to trust look-alike sites. For al-Qaeda, "these sites are the equivalent of pentagon.mil, whitehouse.gov, att.com," said Evan F. Kohlmann, an expert on online al-Qaeda operations who has advised the FBI and others. With just one authorized al-Qaeda site still in business, "this has left al-Qaeda's propaganda strategy hanging by a very narrow thread."-http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/17/AR2008101703367.html?hpid=topnews

Now according to the reports, somehow these websites were taken down and they can't get them back up again. As if someone attacked them and now they are disabled. But then, if you remember there was a lot of "chatter" before That Day, then everything went silent. Maybe they don't need to blog anymore. Maybe the have now decided what to do.

Then you go back to Noami Wolf's video that I posted yesterday. The point that got to me was the fact that the men who control Bush have shifted day-to-day control of the 3rd Infantry's 1st Brigade Combat Team to be used to battle "civil disturbances."

What "civil disturbances?" See the above.

And one other thing. The country's finances are in a mess. And that's a nice way to put it. Because of this we have seen some pretty bizarre stuff, including CEO's of bankrupt, disgraced companies going to expensive spas to settle their nerves.

Phrases like "soak the rich," "spoiled rich," and average Americans described as "Joe the Plumber" fill the airwaves.

So we have rich vs poor, white vs black (and maybe both vs brown and or Asian), Gay/Bi vs hetro, left vs right, "main street" vs "Wall Street." All at a fever pitch. Throw in Al-Quida or whoever is in charge of terrorism here and all it takes is for something to happen.

Anything.

That is why I am frightened, because something could happen in the next few days that would pretty much guarantee the current bunch of Armageddonists to keep their positions. And now, I am not accusing either McCain or Palin of being in this bunch. Though I disagree with their politics and positions, I find them pretty decent people, as I find Obama, Biden, and (surprising to many) even to some extent Bush. But (and this is my own opinion only) the gang of thugs that have created situation to create thier own nirvana. Their intention to speed their own version of the Second Coming through harrowing event after event.

What it takes for this to work, though, are people who do not think. Who take defeat with honor. Who are willing to release their hatreds and bigotries, discard their taboos, and come together as humans. To work to solve problems instead of applying band-aids.

In other words, be civilized human beings for once.

But I do not see much chance of that happening.

That's why I'm scared.

Now I hope, all this has been has been the rantings of a frieghtened fool. That after this is all over all of the above would be so much silliness.

So why do I have that creeping feeling in the back of my neck that the above is less ranting and more phophetic?

Naomi Wolf's book entitled The End of America is a chilling and prophetic look of the demise of America as we know it. Click this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfobI5... for a five part video of Naomi talking about her book.

Send this 3 part video out to everyone you know in case this is the last chance we have to wake up people. This may be a false alarm, but what if it isn't? People warned about 911 but the net was not as it is now. Use it to spread the word. Make this go viral.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

After months of pressure from an anti-gay-marriage group, McDonald's Corp. has given up a director's seat and will stop sponsorship of a national gay business organization.

Richard Ellis, who until last month was vice president of communications of McDonald's USA, has resigned from the board of directors of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, franchisees were told in a Sept. 23 memo.

McDonald's USA, which had made a $20,000 donation to the chamber and became a 2008 chamber sponsor, said it would not sponsor the organization in 2009.

Ellis, the company said, "made a personal decision to step down" from the board after he got a new position with McDonald's Canadian operations. "It is our policy to not be involved in political and social issues. McDonald's remains neutral on same-sex marriage or any 'homosexual agenda' as defined by the American Family Association," the memo said.

In May, the group called for a boycott of McDonald's over the fast-food chain's association with the gay business organization. The American Family Association, based in Mississippi, runs American Family Radio.

"Our concern was: Here is a family-friendly company that has, all of a sudden, joined hands and became a partner and ally with an organization that is absolutely attacking the moral foundation of our nation; trying to redefine marriage in our nation," said Buddy Smith, executive assistant to the group's chairman. "All we were asking is that they just simply be neutral in the culture wars and focus on doing their business and remain neutral."

The chamber, based in Washington, D.C., said it doesn't lobby for same-sex marriage.

Franchisees were feeling the heat from their customers, said Richard Adams of the Franchise Equity Group consultancy. "It was a huge issue for customers in the South. They put a lot of pressure on franchisees," he said.

There are time when I wonder, for all we say abour corporations being so all-powerful, if anyone has the balls to stand up to this small band of bigots. I'm really running out of places to go. NBC, Ford, now McDonald's......is there anyone out there who will get in the face of these maggots and call them out for what they are.

In the meantime, hand me that Whopper....

Now to my inbox. Its seems that Little Timmy, NoNeck's spawn, has learned to write:

Dear Donald,

California marriage activist James Lambert will be addressing the Los Angeles city council on Tuesday, October 21, 2008.

Essentially, he will be asking city council members to support traditional marriage via Prop 8. He will present a pledge for council members to sign in support of traditional marriage. Already gay web sites are sprouting up trying to confuse the voters to vote no on Prop. 8.

At 10am he will be addressing city of Los Angeles, CA (non-agenda comments usually are held during the first 30 min of their meeting).

Support from AFA members would be appreciated. You can CALL your city council member and ask him or her to PUBLICLY support Prop. 8, or you can attend the meeting's first 1/2 hour to vocally support James' efforts.

Sincerly,

Tim Wildmon

Well, Little Timmy, my councilperson's name is Tony Cardenas. And I AM writing him to not support your stoonge, Mr. Lambert.Your amendment is failing, Timmy, your world is crumbling. I am just afraid what would be your next move when it does.

Finally, evidence that this foolishness starts to damn early every damned year...and again from the inbox:

It's hard to believe that there are companies and individuals who want to ban "Merry Christmas" and replace it with "Holiday Greetings" because, they say, they don't want to offend anyone.

Christians can take a stand and proclaim to our communities that Christmas is not just a winter holiday focused on materialism, but a "holy day" when we celebrate the birth of our Savior. We can do it in a gentle and effective way by wearing the “It’s OK to say Merry Christmas” button.

You can help preserve our tradition of greeting others with a “Merry Christmas” by taking a vital leadership role in AFA’s "Project Merry Christmas."

Here's how. AFA is making available an attractive button and Glossy Sticker that carry on our tradition of saying “It's OK to say Merry Christmas."

Purchase enough buttons for each member of your church and enough Glossy Stickers for each family to have one to go on their automobile. Urge your fellow members to wear their buttons and display the Glossy Stickers during the entire Christmas season.

If you are unable to sponsor your church yourself, ask your Sunday School class to make it a class project. You can even order buttons and Glossy Stickers to share with co-workers, children in Christian schools, customers, etc.

Some might think simply wearing a button or displaying a Glossy Sticker is a small thing, but God can use small things to make a big point, and to create opportunities to share the Good News. And what a great time to do that at Christmas!

AFA is asking individuals like you in thousands of communities across the nation to head up this project in their local churches. Your willingness to underwrite the cost for your church and enthusiastically promote this project is the key to making an impact in your area.

OF Course, its ok to say "Merry Xmas," as it is ok to say "Happy Holidays." Personally, I'm just about done with the whole holiday, since you can't do anything on that day, can't make any money, can't go anywhere, yada yada yada.

But Donny Dear....THIS F*CKIN' EARLY, MAN?!?!?!?!?!????

Don't you....and anyone else....have the decency to at least wait until f*ckin' Thanksgiving for this sh*t? Thank you KSDK of St. Louis for starting the ball rolling by going all-Xmas ON OCTOBER F8CKING TENTH!!!!!!!!! Thanks loads, a88holes!

Sorry for the explitives, but Jesus, Don, we can have this little war anytime after the last week in November. I mean I know you hate me (so does the rest of the net, actually), but have a little mercym, would ya.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

As I see it, the Palin Effect is a double-headed hydra. On one side you have Todd Palin, who is clearly a vibrant, macho force in his family’s life. Just as clearly, he has effectively embraced the role as a primary caregiver. What does it say that he and Sarah have a mutually aggrandizing partnership/marriage? A successful professional woman who embraces a masculine male rather than castrate him? Heaven forfend! Personally I see it as the benign (and noble) conclusion of the feminist movement. I guess fish don’t need bicycles, but some of them want one. And they’d rather it come with some cojones.

Discussing the Sarah Palin effect is quickly becoming a national psychosis, to which I doubt I could add much. The only thing I haven’t seen discussed is a comparison between her popularity and what Rush Limbaugh hilariously and intuitively called Bill Clinton’s “Arousal Gap." I think we’re seeing that Todd Palin isn’t the only man’s man out there who has a healthy appreciation for a strong member of the opposite sex. Here is another benign and admirable consequence of the feminist movement.

Steve GurneyNiceville, Florida

Yes, both Todd and Sarah Palin, whom most people in the U.S. and abroad had never even heard of until six weeks ago, have emerged as powerful new symbols of a revived contemporary feminism. That the macho Todd, with his champion athleticism and working-class cred, can so amiably cradle babies and care for children is a huge step forward in American sexual symbolism.

Although nothing will sway my vote for Obama, I continue to enjoy Sarah Palin's performance on the national stage. During her vice-presidential debate last week with Joe Biden (whose conspiratorial smiles with moderator Gwen Ifill were outrageous and condescending toward his opponent), I laughed heartily at Palin's digs and slams and marveled at the way she slowly took over the entire event. I was sorry when it ended! But Biden wasn't -- judging by his Gore-like sighs and his slow sinking like a punctured blimp. Of course Biden won on points, but TV (a visual medium) never cares about that.

The mountain of rubbish poured out about Palin over the past month would rival Everest. What a disgrace for our jabbering army of liberal journalists and commentators, too many of whom behaved like snippy jackasses. The bourgeois conventionalism and rank snobbery of these alleged humanitarians stank up the place. As for Palin's brutally edited interviews with Charlie Gibson and that viper, Katie Couric, don't we all know that the best bits ended up on the cutting-room floor? Something has gone seriously wrong with Democratic ideology, which seems to have become a candied set of holier-than-thou bromides attached like tutti-frutti to a quivering green Jell-O mold of adolescent sentimentality.

And where is all that lurid sexual fantasy coming from? When I watch Sarah Palin, I don't think sex -- I think Amazon warrior! I admire her competitive spirit and her exuberant vitality, which borders on the supernormal. The question that keeps popping up for me is whether Palin, who was born in Idaho, could possibly be part Native American (as we know her husband is), which sometimes seems suggested by her strong facial contours. I have felt that same extraordinary energy and hyper-alertness billowing out from other women with Native American ancestry -- including two overpowering celebrity icons with whom I have worked.

One of the most idiotic allegations batting around out there among urban media insiders is that Palin is "dumb." Are they kidding? What level of stupidity is now par for the course in those musty circles? (The value of Ivy League degrees, like sub-prime mortgages, has certainly been plummeting. As a Yale Ph.D., I have a perfect right to my scorn.) People who can't see how smart Palin is are trapped in their own narrow parochialism -- the tedious, hackneyed forms of their upper-middle-class syntax and vocabulary.

As someone whose first seven years were spent among Italian-American immigrants (I never met an elderly person who spoke English until we moved from Endicott to rural Oxford, New York, when I was in first grade), I am very used to understanding meaning through what might seem to others to be outlandish or fractured variations on standard English. Furthermore, I have spent virtually my entire teaching career (nearly four decades) in arts colleges, where the expressiveness of highly talented students in dance, music and the visual arts takes a hundred different forms. Finally, as a lover of poetry (my last book was about that), I savor every kind of experimentation with standard English -- beginning with Shakespeare, who was the greatest improviser of them all at a time when there were no grammar rules.

Many others listening to Sarah Palin at her debate went into conniptions about what they assailed as her incoherence or incompetence. But I was never in doubt about what she intended at any given moment. On the contrary, I was admiring not only her always shapely and syncopated syllables but the innate structures of her discourse -- which did seem to fly by in fragments at times but are plainly ready to be filled with deeper policy knowledge, as she gains it (hopefully over the next eight years of the Obama presidencies). This is a tremendously talented politician whose moment has not yet come. That she holds views completely opposed to mine is irrelevant.

Even if she disappears from the scene forever after a McCain defeat, Palin will still have made an enormous and lasting contribution to feminism. As I said in my last column, Palin has made the biggest step forward in reshaping the persona of female authority since Madonna danced her dominatrix way through the shattered puritan barricades of the feminist establishment. In 1990, in a highly controversial New York Times op-ed that attacked old-guard feminist ideology, I declared that "Madonna is the future of feminism" -- a prophecy that was ridiculed at the time but that turned out to be quite true. Madonna put pro-sex feminism on the international map.

But it is now 18 years later -- the span of an entire generation. The instabilities and diminishments for young women raised in an increasingly shallow media environment have become all too obvious. I had grown up in a vibrant pop culture with glorious women stars of voluptuous sensuality -- above all Elizabeth Taylor, sewn into that silky white slip as the vixen Manhattan call girl of "Butterfield 8." In college, I feasted on foreign films starring sexual sophisticates like Jeanne Moreau, Anouk Aimée and Catherine Deneuve. Sex today, however, has become brittle and superficial. Except for the occasional diverting flash of Lindsay Lohan's borrowed bosom, I see nothing whatever that is worth a second glance. Pro-sex feminism has worked itself out and, like all movements, has degenerated into clichés. And even Madonna, with her skeletal megalomania, looks like a refugee from a horror movie.

The next phase of feminism must circle back and reappropriate the ancient persona of the mother -- without losing career ambition or power of assertion. Betty Friedan, who had first attacked the cult of postwar domesticity, had long warned second-wave feminists such as Gloria Steinem about the damaging exclusion of homemakers from their value system. The animus of liberal feminists toward religion must also end (I am speaking as an atheist). Feminism must reexamine all of its assumptions, including its death grip on abortion, if it wishes to survive.

The hysterical emotionalism and eruptions of amoral malice at the arrival of Sarah Palin exposed the weaknesses and limitations of current feminism. But I am convinced that Palin's bracing mix of male and female voices, as well as her grounding in frontier grit and audacity, will prove to be a galvanizing influence on aspiring Democratic women politicians too, from the municipal level on up. Palin has shown a brand-new way of defining female ambition -- without losing femininity, spontaneity or humor. She's no pre-programmed wonk of the backstage Hillary Clinton school; she's pugnacious and self-created, the product of no educational or political elite -- which is why her outsider style has been so hard for media lemmings to comprehend. And by the way, I think Tina Fey's witty impersonations of Palin have been fabulous. But while Fey has nailed Palin's cadences and charm, she can't capture the energy, which is a force of nature.

Oct. 08, 2008 | Dear Camille,

I was actually leaning towards Obama before he stated his willingness to enter negotiations with Iran with no pre-conditions. This is frightening stuff here. My wife and I lived in Germany for five years until late 2006, and I worked in Baghdad during the better part of 2006. His offer is reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain, but I don't think Obama's motives are as sincere as Chamberlain's. Like most politicians, I believe Obama says what the people want to hear. He doesn't come across as a change agent.

Sincerely,Philip Steelman

Your concern about the foreign-policy world-view of liberal Democrats is certainly justified. The university culture at Columbia and Harvard through which Obama passed has been drenched in a reflexive anti-Americanism for several decades. Armchair blame-America-first leftism is the default mode. Disdain for the military is rampant, and conservative voices are rarely heard.

However, your invocation of Neville Chamberlain may be a bit alarmist because there is no Hitler on the horizon -- just a series of regional petty dictators who, in my view, can be contained or neutralized through joint international efforts rather than open war. But the Chamberlain parallel cannot be entirely discounted, because British and European artists and intellectuals during that highly creative first generation of avant-garde modernism did indeed drift away from national affiliation into a chic, passive cosmopolitanism.

As an Obama supporter, however, I was not particularly troubled by his rather carelessly phrased response about negotiation without preconditions during a primary debate with Hillary Clinton. I don't believe that would in fact happen during an Obama administration, when the new president would have time to reflect and to absorb State Department briefing books. Surely the standard, prudent diplomatic protocols would kick into action.

I am well aware of the widespread conservative view of Obama's naivete and lack of preparation (Rush Limbaugh stingingly calls him a "man-child"). But I am one of the many who regard Obama as authentically inspirational -- as a leader appealing to our better nature rather than armoring us in eternal fear and paranoia against our fellow human beings. I remember how John F. Kennedy (the first politician I ever campaigned for) electrified young people and transformed our political reality, which was about to emerge from the long, grey slog of the Cold War.

What would concern me more about an Obama administration, given these rampant doubts, is the possibility that he would jump more readily toward war in order to prove his toughness. We don't need more foolish military incursions, bogging us down in regions whose vicious factionalism has boiled irresolvably for 3,000 years. Where our national interest is not directly at stake, we should mind our own business. Israel, on the other hand, whose very survival might be menaced by a nuclear Iran, would always have the right of preemptive self-defense.

For years I have been trying to find a way to expain how I feel about censorship and the deacying feces that propogate it.

Then I realized that those words were said about 8 years ago.

Somehow, a piece of brilliance called Action made on to the FOX schedule at that time. It starred the since-neutered Jay Mohr as Peter Dragon, a hot-shot action producer whose moral compass was never installed properly.

In this scene, Mr. Dragon is called on to Congress to explain why he makes such "despicable" films. He does, in one of the most brilliant pro-speech-freedom-anti-prude-patrol rants I have ever heard in my 53 years of life.....

Listen....and take to heart. It is a clarity we need now. Especially in places like MySpace and Multiply....

Last night at work, my eyes were opened to how deep and wide this phobia we seem to have is.

There is a supervisor where I work. I do not thing I would be exaggerating whenI say she is one of the most impossibly beautiful women I have ever met. Perfect skin, long red hair, the whole 9 yards. Married, two beautiful children. I like her.

Or at least I did until last night.

The discussion last night turned to an Amendment to the California constitution that would say that marriage should only be between one man and one woman. As a bisexual man, I am opposed to this. The two supervisiors were arguing the point. The female supervisor I mentioned was for 8. She could not see how a clergyman could marry two men or two women. She as adamant about this (please excuse any typos).

It was then I piped up and mentioned that it was not to long ago that two people of different races could not marry in many places could not marry. The woman was agast. She could not believe it...but it is true.

Bigots as late as the 60's (and maybe even now) used Bible scripture as reasons to ban the "mixing of the races," aka miscegenation. And using that.....and just plain bigotry, they codified it into law:

I mentioned that, and the fact that the Bible does not look kindly towards, say married women with children who work outside the home. Did not matter, she said that same-sex marriage was wrong.....why?.....because it said so in the Bible....and?.....that's it.

And then I realized, that if she knew I was bisexual, whatever feelings she had towards me would change. So I clocked out, said nothing, but was more than a bit saddened by the bigotry I witnessed.

And I do not use the term "bigotry" lightly. I reserve it, not just for those who wear the sheets, but for people too ignorant to see that in a religeous-neutral world, it should not matter what gender....or, hell, even the number of people (among a lot of other things) who commit to each other.

Maybe they are afraid that people of alternative sexualities would be more successful at this committment thing than straight people (considering that the diovorce rate nationwide still hovers around 50%, and that the one state where same-sex marriage is legal, Massachusetts, has the lowest divorce rate in the nation, maybe thier fears are justified!).

I do know that what is truly right, and that is that everyone should have the same freedoms as others. Especially sexual freedoms. That if we stop fearing, we might be more well-adjusted, saner, happier.

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

As many of you know, one of my favorite targets is Rev. Donald Wildmon, Tupelo, MS, USA, head of the American Family ASSociation. It is a right-wing, neoXian organization whose fundamental task is to drag America kicking and scareaming back to the 17th Century.

We here in Cal-leee-fornia have a Proposition, number 8, that is supposed to ban marraige between two people of similar gender. AFA and other have been pouring a lot of money into this. The reason: if California rejects this, the the "Culture Wars" are over, and the good guys....we folk...have won.

The passing of this is shaky at best: The latest Survey USA poll showed the amendment to CA's constitution TRAILING 44-Yes, 49-No.